Would Mario Gomez Be a Smart Summer Signing for Chelsea?
Chelsea's priority in the summer transfer window is to sign a world-class striker. Having missed out on long-term target Radamel Falcao, thoughts have turned toward Bayern Munich striker Mario Gomez.
Gomez won the treble with Bayern this season as they romped to the Bundesliga title, before laying the demons of 2011-12 to rest by winning both the DFB-Pokal and the Champions League. However, he has been used sparingly in 2012-13 and has reportedly sold his house in preparation for a move away from Munich, according to Charles Perrin of the Daily Express.
John Edwards of the Daily Mail has also reported that Jose Mourinho is interested in bringing the £25 million-valued striker to West London, and at around half the price of Edinson Cavani, he could represent a good deal for the Blues.
Gomez has scored 19 goals in 32 appearances in 2012-13, despite only playing the full 90 minutes on four occasions. He scored twice in the Pokal final and got a hat trick in 13 minutes during Bayern's 6-1 demolition of Wolfsburg in the Bundesliga.
The 27-year-old German national is equally proficient with both feet and has a natural knack for appearing in the right place at the right time. He can hold the ball up well and is always looking to get on the end of an attacking move.
Should Chelsea try to sign Mario Gomez?
The major flaw in any deal for him would be his injury woes. Having had surgery on an ankle injury following Euro 2012, Gomez returned to the Bayern squad in November 2012. Despite scoring on his return to the Bundesliga, he struggled to get significant game time, which led to a second injury, sustained in March 2013.
This situation is all too familiar, as Fernando Torres was in a similar position before signing for the Blues. With all of the subsequent drama surrounding his struggles to regain his form, it would make sense for Roman Abramovich to exercise caution in any deal for Gomez. All the signs point to him being a very good signing for Chelsea, but it is truly a case of "buyer, beware."
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?